Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Male Anas platyrhynchos breeding plumage.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Male Anas platyrhynchos breeding plumage.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2010 at 10:39:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Grand-Duc - uploaded by Grand-Duc - nominated by Grand-Duc -- Grand-Duc (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Grand-Duc (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)- Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:01, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - sorry, but the foreground is distracting. Jonathunder (talk) 19:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)- Oppose, it's a pretty good photo technically, but the composition looks dull to me, and for such a common subject to be FP I'd expect more than just "pretty good technically". —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:35, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Indeed, a pretty good photo technically. But part of the animal is hidden by the grass. --Cayambe (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment The duck was sitting there, so surely no important part, like special colour schemes, is hidden. Grand-Duc (talk) 15:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose -- As above though this is a nice snapshot. To be featured a picture needs to have extraordinary beauty or value, as well as very good technical quality. This photo has none. I wonder why such a high ISO rating was used, causing unnecessary noise. --Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:27, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Comment That's an interesting opinion to see ISO 400 as a "high ISO rating", especially on modern DSLR cameras... I used this setting in order to minimize motion blurring - the lens that I used is not equipped with an image stabilizer. Grand-Duc (talk) 17:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Even in modern DSLR cameras an ISO setting of 400 may cause visible noise (that is the case, anyway). As for the minimization of motion blur, a shutter speed of 1/1000 is an exageration, 1/150 would be enough with the focal lens of your camera. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know that a 1/160s would have been enough for a focal length of 100mm. But there were other mallard ducks in the vicinity from which I tried to take portraits, using the full focal length of 300mm of my Canon EF100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM lens. At 300mm, I got a 1/640s at ISO 400, and as I did not want to think about switching the ISO's while looking for a "nice posture" of my "model" and being of the opinion that the possibly visible noise at ISO 400 would only occur to some pixel peepers and bother only a part of them... Anyway, I try to improve my photography skills and got hints that will hopefully help me in that aim. Grand-Duc (talk) 22:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Ilmari. Sorry. --Cephas (talk) 22:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 11:30, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
